'Soon-to-be Hall of Fame point guard and former NBA head coach Jason Kidd still has some major coaching aspirations. In an interview with Yahoo Finance (h/t Dan Feldman of Pro Basketball Talk), Kidd expressed interest Friday in potentially coaching the Golden State Warriors in the future: "One day, I'll come back and hopefully coach in the Bay Area. This has always been home. And so hopefully maybe in high school, maybe in college. Or maybe if Steve Kerr ever decides to stop coaching, I can maybe help out with the Warriors one day."Kidd was fired as head coach of the Milwaukee Bucks last season following a 23-22 start"

Do you think Kidd would attract high level to turn the program around by coaching them up to the way he played? Or do you think the gpa requirement would be a stumbling block?

I don't think players can be coached up to play the way Jason Kidd played, unless you start at a very young age. Court vision, intuition, leadership, aggression, along with unselfishness are possessed by the extraordinarily gifted, and most of those talents usually appears at a young age, perhaps 10 years old or younger. A great point guard can see all nine other players at once, and act accordingly, utilizing his teammates to break down the defenders and create easy shots for his team. Some of those talents can be improved upon by coaching perhaps, but most of them the player is born with. There have been great point guards, but Jason may have been one of a kind. All just my opinion.

would JK be a fit at Cal???of course. would he be a recruiting magnet??yes he would. would he necessarily be a great or even good coach??Depends on thge quality off his assistants and the degree to which he would allow his assistants to augment any HC deficiencies he may possess. A ceremonial HC is not necessarily a drawback as long as the HC cherishes and encourages coaching at the highest level from his assistants. This type of HC must not allow his ego to sabotage excellent coaching/teaching from his Assistants. In theory this is always possible. In practice, theory and $2.75 will only get you a cup of coffee.

Do you think Kidd would attract high level to turn the program around by coaching them up to the way he played? Or do you think the gpa requirement would be a stumbling block?

I don't think players can be coached up to play the way Jason Kidd played, unless you start at a very young age. Court vision, intuition, leadership, aggression, along with unselfishness are possessed by the extraordinarily gifted, and most of those talents usually appears at a young age, perhaps 10 years old or younger. A great point guard can see all nine other players at once, and act accordingly, utilizing his teammates to break down the defenders and create easy shots for his team. Some of those talents can be improved upon by coaching perhaps, but most of them the player is born with. There have been great point guards, but Jason may have been one of a kind. All just my opinion.

Kidd attributed it to always being, by far, the shortest kid in the Oakland playgrounds. So, in order to get chosen, he ingratiated himself to the guys who knew he'd get everybody the ball. But, of course, that was, to a large extent, because he started playing on those playgrounds at a very young age, which suggests that those skills can be learned - but only over a very long period of time

Do you think Kidd would attract high level to turn the program around by coaching them up to the way he played? Or do you think the gpa requirement would be a stumbling block?

I don't think players can be coached up to play the way Jason Kidd played, unless you start at a very young age. Court vision, intuition, leadership, aggression, along with unselfishness are possessed by the extraordinarily gifted, and most of those talents usually appears at a young age, perhaps 10 years old or younger. A great point guard can see all nine other players at once, and act accordingly, utilizing his teammates to break down the defenders and create easy shots for his team. Some of those talents can be improved upon by coaching perhaps, but most of them the player is born with. There have been great point guards, but Jason may have been one of a kind. All just my opinion.

Good point, SFCity. As you said, a great point guard can see all 9 other players, but a Jason Kidd level point guard goes one step further: he knows where all 9 other players are and where they are going without seeing them. I recall a presser of his where he explained how he was able to make a no look pass to Murray who was trailing him on a break without seeing Lamond--something to the effect that since he saw where two defenders were, he knew that Lamond had to be trailing on his right about 10 feet behind him.

Dear Mr. cohen: 'skills can be learned over a long period of time." I was a not a math major, but sustained success is roughly 95% nature and 5% nurture. ( nature includes pure athletic skills but also personality & character which are also largely acquired through DNA. Good coaching and a good support system make up the 5% nurture.

Dear Mr. cohen: 'skills can be learned over a long period of time." I was a not a math major, but sustained success is roughly 95% nature and 5% nurture. ( nature includes pure athletic skills but also personality & character which are also largely acquired through DNA. Good coaching and a good support system make up the 5% nurture.

There are an awful lot of examples of guys who, in the pros, advanced from acceptable to All Star quality through improving skills they didn't have when they started, and without which they (like a lot of other guys) would not have stayed in the league for very long; and the same with guys in college who started out on the bench and wound up AA. One could say that such folks are examples of people whose high character is in their DNA; but, until the science gets to the point where such a statement could be backed up empirically, I would say that it deserves no more "provable truth" credit than any other poetically felt assertion.

Dear Mr. Cohen: My assertion doesn't have one ounce of poetry. it is the synthesis of 81 years of playing and observing sports. when we were in the second grade, everyone could tell who were the athletes and who were thge stiffs. Spoiler alert: The athletes in the second grade were still athletes later in life and the stiffs were still stiffs . My assertion still stands. 5 % nurture. ( the mean, medium and the mode not withstanding)

Dear Mr. Cohen: My assertion doesn't have one ounce of poetry. it is the synthesis of 81 years of playing and observing sports. when we were in the second grade, everyone could tell who were the athletes and who were thge stiffs. Spoiler alert: The athletes in the second grade were still athletes later in life and the stiffs were still stiffs . My assertion still stands. 5 % nurture. ( the mean, medium and the mode not withstanding)

So, everyone is doomed to remain what they were in the second grade. I get it.

Do you think Kidd would attract high level to turn the program around by coaching them up to the way he played? Or do you think the gpa requirement would be a stumbling block?

I don't think players can be coached up to play the way Jason Kidd played, unless you start at a very young age. Court vision, intuition, leadership, aggression, along with unselfishness are possessed by the extraordinarily gifted, and most of those talents usually appears at a young age, perhaps 10 years old or younger. A great point guard can see all nine other players at once, and act accordingly, utilizing his teammates to break down the defenders and create easy shots for his team. Some of those talents can be improved upon by coaching perhaps, but most of them the player is born with. There have been great point guards, but Jason may have been one of a kind. All just my opinion.

+1. I remember a CYO coach at the gym who alerted me to Kidd as a 12 year old who was going places.. Although I did not get to see Kidd at this age, he apparently showed enough to warrant a shout out.

Dear Mr. cohen: 'skills can be learned over a long period of time." I was a not a math major, but sustained success is roughly 95% nature and 5% nurture. ( nature includes pure athletic skills but also personality & character which are also largely acquired through DNA. Good coaching and a good support system make up the 5% nurture.

I disagree with this exact characterization of nature vs nurture, particularly when it comes to character.Ever see siblings who were very different from one another? Same genes, roughly.

Dear Mr. Cohen: My assertion doesn't have one ounce of poetry. it is the synthesis of 81 years of playing and observing sports. when we were in the second grade, everyone could tell who were the athletes and who were thge stiffs. Spoiler alert: The athletes in the second grade were still athletes later in life and the stiffs were still stiffs . My assertion still stands. 5 % nurture. ( the mean, medium and the mode not withstanding)

In defense of the athletic stiffs out there, I pronounce you to be a poetic stiff.Good God, man, you have a way with words.

I suppose I'll be accused of being a snowflake next, right?

FYI, I coach a bunch of 10 year old "stiffs" in soccer. I try to get them wins, goals, and we celebrate their victories. Why? Trying to create joy and increase their confidence - which hopefully remains with them thru life. Calling them stiffs is harsh, so I took offense. ;-)

Dear Concord: I'm happy and thrilled that you coach ten year olds. For purposes of reading comprehension , a "stiff" is merely someone who is not now and never will be a natural athlete. Nuance has it's uses, of course, but I always assume Cal grads will understand the importance of hyperbole and exaggeration when trying to make a point. FYI, I don't know enough about you to know wether you are a "snowflake" or have tendencies in that direction. Simple test: The more you champion absolute free speech, the more tolerant you are. The more you place restrictions on free speech, the more your "snowflake" slip is showing.

Dear Mr. Cohen: My assertion doesn't have one ounce of poetry. it is the synthesis of 81 years of playing and observing sports. when we were in the second grade, everyone could tell who were the athletes and who were thge stiffs. Spoiler alert: The athletes in the second grade were still athletes later in life and the stiffs were still stiffs . My assertion still stands. 5 % nurture. ( the mean, medium and the mode not withstanding)

So, everyone is doomed to remain what they were in the second grade. I get it.

Laird was a walk-on, who was once seventh on Cal's running back depth chart and was even moved to receiver before his 1,000-yard season last year.

Already adept at reading where a defense is flowing and what cut to make as his linemen move to block in the Bears' zone scheme, Laird said he wants to improve his moves to beat defenders in the secondary this season.

The 6-foot, 205-pound senior also wants to improve his pass protection, and after catching 45 passes for 322 yards last year, Laird believes he can expand his route tree this season.

"That's the difference between average and good, and good and great," Wilcox said. "There are a lot of talented people out there but the level of detail is what separates people."

Dear Mr. Cohen: No---you don't get it. I'm not denigrating the 5% culture part. far from it. The 5% ( or 6 or 7) often makes the difference between good and great. The 5% is often the critical factor which separates occasional or usual success with consistent success. It grieves me that you cannot fathom that.

Mr. cohen: Scott Laird was simply a vastly underrated running back coming out off high school. In addition, he had the good fortune to attend a school which rarely featured 4 and 5 star running backs. In addition, Laird has the character ( 95%DNA) and 5% culture ( good coaching and a good support system which separates him from a lot of other competitors in his craft.) That this a difficult concept to grasp not only grieves me but also astonishes me.

Dear Berkeley: you only gauge interest publicly when you are convinced that the current HC simply cannot function effectively either in the present or near future. Cal has not reached that point. Please fast-forward two years or so into the future. Reaching out now totally undermines staff and player confidence. In addition, it would totally destroy recruiting efforts as long as the uncertainty exists. There is a time and place for everything. Jumping ship before taking on water is usually not a good idea.

Mr. cohen: Scott Laird was simply a vastly underrated running back coming out off high school. In addition, he had the good fortune to attend a school which rarely featured 4 and 5 star running backs. In addition, Laird has the character ( 95%DNA) and 5% culture ( good coaching and a good support system which separates him from a lot of other competitors in his craft.) That this a difficult concept to grasp not only grieves me but also astonishes me.

Dear Mr helltopay: please look up the correct names of our players. Either that or go back outside to keep screaming at the clouds.

Mr. cohen: Scott Laird was simply a vastly underrated running back coming out off high school. In addition, he had the good fortune to attend a school which rarely featured 4 and 5 star running backs. In addition, Laird has the character ( 95%DNA) and 5% culture ( good coaching and a good support system which separates him from a lot of other competitors in his craft.) That this a difficult concept to grasp not only grieves me but also astonishes me.

Mr. helltopay1: By referring to Laird by his inside-the-team-only nickname of Scott, I feel like you're flaunting your insider knowledge in an attempt to augment your point. Well, whatever, it worked! Of course, he's not going to be pleased when he sees this info is now on the Internet, but it was only a matter of time, I guess...

Kidd will never coach at Cal. Anyone who thinks that this is a possibility does not understand the premium that the administration puts on hiring coaches who have unambiguously clean character histories and high promise for promoting academic excellence.